Prince Naseem Hamed doesnt get his just due and never will

[Rapid Counter]

that comment is one of those one's that people put in their hall of shame sig.

Hahahaha.

You enjoying that reach around?

[CasualBoxingFan]

In my eyes of the feathweights I have seen he is definitely one of the top ten ever.....I never got to see Abe Attell, George Dixon..but from the 1930's on I have seen him all and he beats most of them...only lost once to an ATG fighter....one of the highest kayo percentage for a champ in his division or others for that matter....in just 37 fights defeated 9 former,future, or current champs of his time....definitely cleaned out his era the mid 90's til early 2000's

my List in no particular order

Greatest featherweights of all-time ive seen

Wille Pep
Sandy Saddler
Salvador Sanchez
Eusebio Pedroza
Naseem Hamed
Vincente Saldivar
Alexis Arguello
Sugar Ramos
Henry Aromstrong
Tony Canzoneri

Naseem Hamed was alright

[therealpugilist]

the reason why i made this thread is because the majority of people who are casual fans or peope who base their opinions based on if they like a fighters personality...they dont give him enough credit and are overly critical...he was the best featherweight of his era

When Barrera, Morales, JMM, and Pacquaio were no names and not even at the weight he was already an established star

Also he started as a teenager and his era was in the mid to late 90's....not the 2000's so to say he avoided the best of his time is a bit off....He actually beat the best of his time and all the title holders around of each organization and did something that the people compare him to didnt do at all of often.....

He was lineal champ at the weight won every title, except for the ones they stripped his opponents off before facing him and actually defended his lineal title several times....No one has done this since him

I dont judge fighters if I like them as a person, I based my opinion on them in the ring...He was entertaining, had a great heart, very good chin and loads of talent and power...was the best of his time and nothing more can be asked of him

[- Ram Raid -]

We could nitpick everyone's competition like that...Kelly only had one loss at the time and was 29/30, I agree Robinson wasnt that good, but Tom Johnson was past prime but had racking up title defenses and was on the best run of his career when he faced Hamed and got beat, Vuyani Bungu and Wilfredo Vazquez were very good fighters as well....Hamed wasnt in his prime when he lost to Barrera so one loss erases everything he did?

In retrospect, he beat every titlist of his time and was lineal champion at 126 for 4 years and only 37 fights beat 9 champions, thats pretty impressive....he is the last dominant featherweight champion their has been in a longtime

Of course, in retrospect we can pull apart anyone's career and one loss doesn't erase everything that he did, that's not what I'm saying. I'm not particularly pulling apart his career after the fact either.

Thompson and Kelley were a step up in class from what he'd faced before but they were ageing fighters who he was expected to beat as part of his career progression. My issue is that I see Barrera as the first real test that he faced in terms of proving his greatness and he failed.

I can't help but remember the amount of times that he compared himself to Ali and said he was going to be one of the greatest ever. He didn't even come close for me, partly 'cause his boxing ability (as a martial art) was poor but also because he was tested, failed and then disappeared.

[Rapid Counter]

the reason why i made this thread is because the majority of people who are casual fans or peope who base their opinions based on if they like a fighters personality...they dont give him enough credit and are overly critical...he was the best featherweight of his era

When Barrera, Morales, JMM, and Pacquaio were no names and not even at the weight he was already an established star

Also he started as a teenager and his era was in the mid to late 90's....not the 2000's so to say he avoided the best of his time is a bit off....He actually beat the best of his time and all the title holders around of each organization and did something that the people compare him to didnt do at all of often.....

He was lineal champ at the weight won every title, except for the ones they stripped his opponents off before facing him and actually defended his lineal title several times....No one has done this since him

I dont judge fighters if I like them as a person, I based my opinion on them in the ring...He was entertaining, had a great heart, very good chin and loads of talent and power...was the best of his time and nothing more can be asked of him

Saying he was the best in his era when the fab four were no names is one thing. Putting nas in your top 10 of all time is something else, especially since he lost to one of the fab four. And between them the fab four pretty much ruined each other making it much harder for any one of them to grab all the belts. That fab four era was better than any comp that nas fought.

Besides all that, I don't agree that nas doesn't get his just due. He gets plenty of love on these boards.

[therealpugilist]

Saying he was the best in his era when the fab four were no names is one thing. Putting nas in your top 10 of all time is something else, especially since he lost to one of the fab four. And between them the fab four pretty much ruined each other making it much harder for any one of them to grab all the belts. That fab four era was better than any comp that nas fought.

Besides all that, I don't agree that nas doesn't get his just due. He gets plenty of love on these boards.

on the boards he does....outside not too much most people call him a joke

[therealpugilist]

Of course, in retrospect we can pull apart anyone's career and one loss doesn't erase everything that he did, that's not what I'm saying. I'm not particularly pulling apart his career after the fact either.

Thompson and Kelley were a step up in class from what he'd faced before but they were ageing fighters who he was expected to beat as part of his career progression. My issue is that I see Barrera as the first real test that he faced in terms of proving his greatness and he failed.

I can't help but remember the amount of times that he compared himself to Ali and said he was going to be one of the greatest ever. He didn't even come close for me, partly 'cause his boxing ability (as a martial art) was poor but also because he was tested, failed and then disappeared.

The Nas of 2000+ wasnt the Naz of 1995 -1999....the combinations were gone, his reflexes and ability to roll shots or dodge them were slipping, and he became more of a fighter depending on his power than the fighter he was before then....we all know fighters that depend on natural gifts, swarmers, brawlers prime is a bit shorter especially if they dont train seriously...the Naz Barrera wasnt the best one IMO...Barrera made his name off beating Hamed and is clearly is biggest win...its not like Naz was kayoed or embarassed like some make it out to be I saw the fight Many times...all im saying is people look at one fight instead of his career as a whole and he deserves more than that...every great fighter or near great has lost except for Marciano, Calzaghe, Ricardo Lopez, and Mayweather so one loss past prime shouldnt hold so much water

[stefjonno1]

Naz seems to be a little overated imo. He was exciting, but we all knew who the big test was 6 or 7 years before he fought him, and he got a whipping.It's his own fault he never came back cuz he could have added to his legacy. Barrera for me completely destroyed his confidence.


Naz imo should never be mentioned in the same breath as Barerra/Morales/Marquez. People were saying Barerra should quit after the Junior jones loss! Look what he achieved after that, that's how a truly great fighter comes back.

[djtmal]

i agree that, the minute prince naseem hamed, stepped up his competition, he would lose, and that actually happened, when he faced the baby faced assassin, marco antonio barrera, but i also thought, that naseem hamed, would show what a true champ he was, and order a rematch, on marco antonio barrera, to avenge the only loss on his record...I thought prince naseem hamed's competition, took a downward spiral since beating kevin kelly, and marco antonio barrera, would be catching prince naseem hamed napping, and prince naseem hamed, would make up and smell the coffee, so to speak...

[djtmal]

Naz seems to be a little overated imo. He was exciting, but we all knew who the big test was 6 or 7 years before he fought him, and he got a whipping.It's his own fault he never came back cuz he could have added to his legacy. Barrera for me completely destroyed his confidence.


Naz imo should never be mentioned in the same breath as Barerra/Morales/Marquez. People were saying Barerra should quit after the Junior jones loss! Look what he achieved after that, that's how a truly great fighter comes back.

stefjonno1, did you happen to see the match between poison junior jones, and kennedy mckinney?...kennedy mckinney, cracked me up in the postfight interview, when he described how he was able to take poison junior jones best punch, and ended the fight with his own straight right hand...stefjonno1, i used to watch a lot of the fights around the featherweight division in the mid-late 90's-early 2000's, because the little guys, used to get it in, my man...(word)